Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
www.elsevier.com/locate/technovation
Abstract
The present paper derives lessons learned about effective technology transfer from research on the technology transfer process
in New Mexico over the past several years. Technology transfer from national R&D laboratories and from research universities
provides the main basis for economic growth by metropolitan regions in the United States. New Mexico is (1) technology-rich
because of Sandia National Laboratories, Los Alamos National Laboratory and the University of New Mexico, and (2) entrepreneurfriendly. High-technology spin-offs are a particularly effective means of technology transfer. The process of technology transfer is
a difficult type of communication, and demands trained and skilled personnel, adequate resources, and organizational and other
reward/incentive structures. 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Technology transfer; Spin-offs; High technology; Regional development
1. Introduction
Many metropolitan regions around the world look at
technopolises like Silicon Valley in Northern California;
Austin, Texas; the Route 128 complex near Boston,
Massachusetts; Tsukuba Science City in Japan; Cambridge, England; and Bangalore and Hyderabad, India;
and may seek to become more like them. The technology
cities create jobs and wealth, and thus are a mechanism
for economic development. For example, in Silicon Valley, undoubtedly the most widely known technopolis in
the world, an average of 63 new millionaires were created each day during 1999 (Nieves, 2000). An analysis
of the rate of economic growth by US metropolitan areas
during the 1990s found that two-thirds of the increase in
economic growth was due to high-technology industry,
fueled in turn by spin-off companies from research universities, federal R&D laboratories and corporate laboratoriess (DeVol, 1999). So, an important policy question
has become how metropolitan regions can harness such
technology transfer for their economic development. The
answer may lie in an improved understanding of the
technology transfer process.
The purpose of the present paper is to summarize lessons learned about technology transfer over the past several years of research on: (1) CRADAs (cooperative R&
D agreements) linking Los Alamos National Laboratory
(LANL) with private companies (Rogers et al., 1998);
(2) spin-offs from LANL and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) (Carayannis et al., 1998), and from research
centers at the University of New Mexico (UNM)
(Steffensen et al., 1999; Rogers et al., 1999a); (3) the
role of entrepreneurs individualistic and collectivistic
cultural values in high-tech spin-offs in New Mexico and
Singapore (Rogers et al., 1999c); (4) the technology
transfer effectiveness of 55 research centers at UNM
(Rogers et al., 1999a; Steffensen et al., 1999); and (5)
the technology transfer effectiveness of 132 research
universities in the United States as they move toward an
era of academic capitalism (Slaughter and Leslie,
1997) in which the university becomes increasingly
involved in the business aspects of transferring researchbased technologies (Rogers et al., 1999b).
0166-4972/01/$ - see front matter 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 6 6 - 4 9 7 2 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 0 3 9 - 0
254
3. Technology transfer
Technology is information that is put into use in order
to accomplish some task (Eveland, 1986). Transfer is
the movement of technology via some communication
channel from one individual or organization to another.
A technological innovation is an idea, practice or object
that is perceived as new by an individual or some other
unit (Rogers, 1995). Therefore, technology transfer is the
application of information (a technological innovation)
into use (Gibson and Rogers, 1994). The technology
transfer process usually involves moving a technological
innovation from an R&D organization to a receptor
organization (such as a private company). A technological innovation is fully transferred when it is commercialized into a product that is sold in the marketplace.
So technology transfer is a special type of communication process.
Technological innovationdevelopment is often
described as a linear process, from basic research, to
applied research, to development, to commercialization,
to diffusion, and to the consequences of the innovation.
A linear model of the innovationdevelopment process
may not fully take into account external environmental
factors, such as market demand or regulatory changes,
which may influence the technological innovation process. The technology transfer process spans the stages
from R&D to commercialization and beyond, but with
particular focus on the interface between R&D (often by
a university research center, a corporate unit, or by a
government laboratory) and commercialization (often
carried out by a private company).
3.1. Technology transfer mechanisms
Technology transfer occurs via various channels of
communication.
1. A spin-off is a new company that is formed (1) by
individuals who were former employees of a parent
organization, and (2) with a core technology that is
transferred from a parent organization (Rogers and
Steffensen, 1999). Spin-offs thus represent the transfer of a technological innovation to a new entrepreneurial company that is formed around that technological innovation. Generally, a spin-off neighbors with
its parent organization, especially, as in Northern New
Mexico, when they are located in an area with an
attractive quality-of-life.1 As more and more spin-offs
occur, including spin-offs of spin-offs, an agglomeration of high-tech companies is formed, eventually
1
Another reason for the agglomeration of spin-offs is that venture
capital does not travel far, due to the need for the venture capitalist to
remain in almost daily contact with the spin-offs in which the venture
capitalist has invested.
2.
3.
4.
5.
255
4. Spin-offs
A spin-off is a technology transfer mechanism
because it is usually formed in order to commercialize
a technology that originated in a government R&D laboratory, a university research center or a private R&D
organization. A high rate of establishing spin-off companies is characteristic of technopolises like Silicon Valley,
Austin, Route 128, Cambridge, Tsukuba Science City
(Dearing and Rogers, 1990) and Bangalore (Singhal and
Rogers, 2000). In fact, spin-offs are the main mechanism
for the rapid growth of each of these technopolises.
We examined the high-technology spin-off process
through which a new company is formed from a parent
organization, in the case of (1) seven spin-off companies
in New Mexico and Japan (Carayannis et al., 1998), and
(2) six spin-offs from the University of New Mexico
(Steffensen et al., 1999). An investigation of 30 spinoffs, mainly from LANL and SNL, is presently being
conducted. Support from the parent organization, such
as by providing venture funding, business management
advice, building space or other needed resources, is
especially helpful to the spin-off company. In some
cases, facilitating organizations support a new spin-off
by providing resources and know-how.
Various support organizations have been established
in New Mexico to assist high-tech entrepreneurs in the
difficult process of formulating a business plan,
obtaining venture capital, and getting their new business
underway. For example, the Technology Ventures Corporation and the Business Technology Group (BTG), a
collective of three Albuquerque-based incubators, play
important roles in supporting spin-off companies. Small
Business Innovation Research (SBIR) funding from federal research agencies is particularly important for hightech spin-offs in New Mexico. These companies
received a total of $18 million in SBIR funding in 1998.
We found that the SBIR funding, although typically in
modest amounts per grant, often helped keep a spin-off
alive until it could attract investment from a venture
capitalist.
Our research on spin-offs began by identifying 70 new
high-tech companies that had spun off the federal R&D
laboratories or the University of New Mexico during the
1990s. This list, believed to be fairly exhaustive, was
obtained through a snowball technique beginning with
the technology transfer offices of the two federal R&D
labs and the various support organizations assisting new
ventures in New Mexico, such as the Technology Ven-
256
257
258
Fig. 1.
number of faculty, student enrolment and R&D expenditures; and (2) a stronger commitment to technology transfer, indicated by the support of university administrators,
the number of staff members in the office of technology
licensing, etc. (Rogers et al., 1999b).
Many research universities are becoming growth
engines for regional economic development through the
technology transfer process (DeVol, 1999). The University of New Mexico ranks 88th among the 131 research
universities in the United States in technology transfer
effectiveness. In the mid-1990s the University established a Science and Technology Corporation to (1)
manage real estate and technology transfer activities
connected with the Technology Park, and (2) oversee
the Universitys office of technology licensing, which
became energized in the late 1990s. The University is
thus involved in facilitating technology transfer such as
through incubators, the research park, etc. One role in
this technology transfer process is provided by the Universitys office of technology licensing.
259
260
Acknowledgements
The authors express their thanks to the Mitsubishi
International Corporation, San Francisco, for supporting
the present research on technology transfer. The present
paper was originally presented at the International Conference on Technology Policy and Innovation, August
30September 2, 1999, in Austin, Texas.
References
Anon, 1995. The Basics of Licensing. Licensing Executive Society of
USA and Canada, Alexandria, VA.
Blumenstyk, G., 1999. How one university pursued profit from
science and won. Chronicle of Higher Education (February 12).
Bozeman, B., 1994. Evaluating government technology transfer: early
impacts of the cooperative technology paradigm. Political Studies
Journal 22 (2), 322337.
Carayannis, E.G., Rogers, E.M., Kurihara, K., Allbritton, M.M., 1998.
High-technology spin-offs from government R&D laboratories and
research universities. Technovation 18 (1), 111.
Dearing, J.W., Rogers, E.M., 1990. Japan: Tsukuba Science City. In:
Williams, F., Gibson, D.V. (Eds.), Technology Transfer. Sage,
Newbury Park, CA.
DeVol, R.C., 1999. Americas high-tech economy: growth, development, and risk for metropolitan areas, Report. In:. Miliken Institute, Santa Monica, CA.
Erbisch, F., 1999. Personal interview. Office of Intellectual Property,
Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI (February 8).
Eveland, J.D., 1986. Diffusion, technology transfer, and implementation. Knowledge 8 (2), 303322.
Geizer, E., Clements, C., 1995. Commercialization of technology from
federal laboratories: the effects of barriers, incentives, and the role
of internal entrepreneurship. Report to the National Science Foundation. In:. University of Wisconsin at Whitewater, Whitewater,
WI.
Gibson, D.V., Rogers, E.M., 1994. R&D Collaboration on Trial: The
Microelectronics and Computer Technology Consortium. Harvard
Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Massing, D.E., 1997. AUTM Licensing Survey: Fiscal Year 1997.
Association of University Technology Managers, Norwalk, CT.
261